Switch - Chip Heath [75]
Frustrated, the executives tried using fiat power, announcing that the new online tool was mandatory. “That worked for about half of the employees,” said Bregman. “The rest simply ignored it.” The executives were ready to escalate the battle: They prepared a memo saying that people wouldn’t get their paychecks unless they used the online tool. (Side note: In our experience, people who are trying to change things often reach instinctively for carrots and sticks. But this strategy indicates a pretty crude view of human behavior—that people act only in response to bribes and punishments. And it quickly becomes absurd. Are you going to break out the “no paycheck” stick for every change you want to make in your workplace?)
Bregman put the brakes on. “Wait,” he said. “Do we know why people aren’t doing the online time sheet?” The executives assumed that the consultants were Luddites or simply obstinate—classic labels inspired by the Fundamental Attribution Error. Bregman persuaded the executives to do a bit more investigation.
The employees who turned in paper time sheets were asked why they weren’t using the online tool. Paper was easier, they said. Skeptical, the interviewers asked if they could observe the employees while they filled out the online time sheet. The results were telling.
Lots of employees started grousing as soon as they encountered the “wizard” that was built into the online tool. Ironically, the wizard was intended to help people fill out the form. Think of the annoying paper clip guy in Microsoft Office who wants to help you write a letter. Now imagine that you have no choice but to accept his “help.” When the executives killed the wizard, allowing people to skip directly to the form itself, compliance rates rose immediately, and within a few weeks everyone was using the online tool.
“People weren’t being defiant,” said Bregman. They were just proceeding on the easiest Path.
What’s sadly typical about this story is that the executives didn’t initially look for a Path solution. Instead, they wanted to spook the Elephant by threatening to withhold a paycheck. Bregman says they were mentally stuck: “‘Well, I already asked them to do it. I taught them how to do it. I told them they had to do it. I don’t know what else to do!’” At that point, the executives felt they’d tried every tool in their toolbox, so they jumped to punishments.
“We’re taught to focus on incentives by our business background,” says Bregman. “Or even our parents: ‘Do this or you won’t get your allowance!’” But executives—and parents—often have more tools than they think they have. If you change the path, you’ll change the behavior.
—————————— CLINIC ——————————
Can You Get Problem Students to Come to Class on Time?
SITUATION Bart Millar, an American history teacher at Lincoln High School in Portland, Oregon, is frustrated by a few of his students, like Robby and Kent, who frequently arrive late and then sit in the back of the room, talking to each other and laughing and disrupting the class. Millar has tried getting tough with them—being strict and even sending them to the principal a few times. Nothing seems to work. What can he do to get these students under control? [Bart Millar and the situation are real, but the kids’ names are disguised.]
WHAT’S THE SWITCH AND WHAT’S HOLDING IT BACK? If Millar tries to get Robby and Kent to “act like model students,” he’ll be doomed to fail. Let’s focus on the critical move: Millar wants Robby and Kent to be in their seats before the class starts. If he manages to succeed with that (no small feat), he can keep snowballing the change.
What’s holding back the switch? Let’s face it, this probably isn’t a Rider problem. Robby and Kent know exactly when they’re supposed to be in their seats, so we won’t even think about the Rider. It’s an Elephant problem. The kids aren’t enthused about showing up on time, especially if doing so means less time hanging out with their friends in the hallways. The Path might also play a role: Are there aspects of the environment